Journal of rehabilitation medicine · 2022
Effects of Different Montages of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation on Haemodynamic Responses and Motor Performance in Acute Stroke: A Randomized Controlled Trial.
СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Klomjai Wanalee, Aneksan Benchaporn, Chotik-Anuchit Songkram, Jitkaew Pentida, Chaichanudomsuk Kasina, Piriyaprasarth Pagamas, Vachalathiti Roongtiwa, Nilanon Yongchai, Hiengkaew Vimonwan
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) has shown positive results in neurorehabilitation. However, there is limited evidence on its use in acute stroke, and unclear evidence regarding the best tDCS montage (anodal-, cathodal-, or dualtDCS) for stroke recovery. This study investigated the effects of these montages combined with physical therapy on haemodynamic response and motor performance.
METHODS: Eighty-two eligible acute stroke participants were allocated randomly into anodal, cathodal, dual, and sham groups. They received 5 consecutive sessions of tDCS combined with physical therapy for 5 days. Cerebral mean blood flow velocity (MFV) and motor outcomes were assessed pre and post-intervention and at a 1-month follow-up.
RESULTS: None of the groups showed significant changes in the MFV in the lesioned or non-lesioned hemispheres immediately post-intervention or at a 1-month follow-up. For motor performance, all outcomes improved over time for all groups; between-group comparisons showed that the dual-tDCS group had significantly greater improvement than the other groups for most of the lower-limb performance measures. All 5-day tDCS montages were safe.
CONCLUSION: MFV was not modulated following active or sham groups. However, dual-tDCS was more efficient in improving motor performance than other groups, especially for lower-limb performance, with after-effects lasting at least 1 month.
METHODS: Eighty-two eligible acute stroke participants were allocated randomly into anodal, cathodal, dual, and sham groups. They received 5 consecutive sessions of tDCS combined with physical therapy for 5 days. Cerebral mean blood flow velocity (MFV) and motor outcomes were assessed pre and post-intervention and at a 1-month follow-up.
RESULTS: None of the groups showed significant changes in the MFV in the lesioned or non-lesioned hemispheres immediately post-intervention or at a 1-month follow-up. For motor performance, all outcomes improved over time for all groups; between-group comparisons showed that the dual-tDCS group had significantly greater improvement than the other groups for most of the lower-limb performance measures. All 5-day tDCS montages were safe.
CONCLUSION: MFV was not modulated following active or sham groups. However, dual-tDCS was more efficient in improving motor performance than other groups, especially for lower-limb performance, with after-effects lasting at least 1 month.